Charges cite a 2013 article in which Yosef Elitzur said so-called ‘price tag’ assailants are those ‘who take responsibility for the security of Jews’
ed note–in the immortal words of Ned Flanders from ‘The Simpsons’ fame, this is a ‘dilly of a pickle’.
You see, according to the sacred texts of Judaism as outlined in the Torah, Jews are not just permitted to kill Gentiles in ‘redeeming’ the holy land, but are COMMANDED to do so, to wit–
‘When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are to possess and casts out the many peoples living there, you shall then slaughter them all and utterly destroy them…You shall save nothing alive that breathes…You shall make no agreements with them nor show them any mercy. You shall destroy their altars, break down their images, cut down their groves and burn their graven images with fire. For you are a holy people unto the LORD thy God and He has chosen you to be a special people above all others upon the face of the earth…’–Book of Deuteronomy’
So, indeed, the ‘good Rabbi’ is correct in his interpretation of what Judaism outlines, and the authorities in Israel know this to be the case, HOWEVER, this is a fact that MUST be hidden from Gentile view if I$rael is to continue with the charade of being a ‘western style democracy’ and all the rest of the hasbara that she utilizes in seducing and confusing world gentile opinion about her, and it is for this reason that charges have been brought against the ‘good Rabbi’. All can rest assured however that as soon as Israel has secured her place as the dominant political, economic and military power in the world, no such demonstrations of juris prudence will be taking place any further and she will be free to do whatever the hell she wants without paying any mind to the backlash that might ensue.
Times of Israel
A settler rabbi who praised and encouraged attacks against Palestinians in two articles was indicted Tuesday on charges of incitement to violence.
The charge sheet against Yitzhar settlement rabbi Yosef Elitzur cited two inflammatory articles written by the controversial teacher and columnist in 2013. Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit approved the indictment against Elitzur, filed Tuesday at the Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court.
Elitzur is the co-author of the controversial “Torat Hamelech” book, which suggested that Jewish law permits killing non-Jews in certain circumstances, though he has faced no charges of incitement to violence for that text.
In the first article, published online a day after the murder of Evyatar Borovsky, an Israeli father of five, in a West Bank terror attack in July 2013, Elitzur praised Jews who carried out hate crimes against Palestinians as “buds of a growing public that take responsibility for the security of the Jews.” He wrote that such assailants represented a vision for a government that truly represents the Jewish people.
In a second article published later that month, Elitzur went further, suggesting that Jewish extremist attackers were doing the IDF’s work in “containing” Palestinian terrorism. He said that revenge crimes should be seen in a “positive sense” in order to unite the Jewish people.
Both articles appeared on the Hakol Hayehudi website.
The indictment against Elitzur, a senior rabbi of Yitzhar’s Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva, said he should have removed the content when both articles received considerable feedback from supporters of such attacks. However, Elitzur failed to do so, the court documents said.
“Torat Hamelech,” the 2009 book Elitzur co-authored, intended as a compendium of Jewish religious laws on relations between Jews and non-Jews, came under heavy fire for discussing circumstances in which Jewish law permits the killing of non-Jews, based on a selective and controversial reading of Jewish texts.
Many saw the book as justifying violence against Palestinians and Arabs. One chapter states that the prohibition of “Thou shalt not kill” does not apply to a Jew who kills a gentile. It also claims that it is permitted to kill an enemy during a state of war even if he poses no threat. In addition to a chapter on the spiritual inferiority of non-Jews, the authors write that even noncombatants and children, if they are non-Jewish, may be killed in war.
Though the authors — Elitzur and Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira — are affiliated with the right-wing settler movement, the book and its claims were immediately rejected by the majority of mainstream Orthodox leadership.
The charges on Tuesday came after the Israel Religious Action Center (IRAC) and anti-racism group Tag Meir filed a petition against Elitzur to the High Court of Justice, imploring the attorney general to sign off on a police indictment.
Speaking with The Times of Israel following the indictment, IRAC attorney Orly Erez-Likhovski said her organization has been pursuing prosecution of Elitzur since 2010, and had filed two additional petitions before that. She pointed out that the last petition cited an even more inflammatory article from 2009 in which Elitzur provided instructions on how to carry out attacks against Arabs.
For a short while today I happened to listen to talk radio. Mentioned was the ‘Supreme’ Court decision in the Brandenburg v. Ohio case, which involved a KKK leader in Ohio who was charged under Ohio statutes (1969). The lower court decision was overturned by the Supremes and appears to legitimize and enshrine Talmudic halacha in American law.
[Remember, the KKK was either started or subsequently infiltrated and then mostly run, by the intelligence services for a variety of purposes, including, among many things, entrapment and incitement to violence.]
From Cornell’s Legal Information Institute (LII), Chicago-Kent College of Law and Justia.com. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/492
Facts of the Case
“Brandenburg, a leader in the Ku Klux Klan, made a speech at a Klan rally and was later convicted under an Ohio criminal syndicalism law. The law made illegal advocating “crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing industrial or political reform,” as well as assembling “with any society, group, or assemblage of persons formed to teach or advocate the doctrines of criminal syndicalism.”
Question
“Did Ohio’s criminal syndicalism law, prohibiting public speech that advocates various illegal activities, violate Brandenburg’s right to free speech as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments?”
Opinion
“The Court’s Per Curiam opinion held that the Ohio law violated Brandenburg’s right to free speech. The Court used a two-pronged test to evaluate speech acts: (1) speech can be prohibited if it is “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” and (2) it is “likely to incite or produce such action.” The criminal syndicalism act made illegal the advocacy and teaching of doctrines while ignoring whether or not that advocacy and teaching would actually incite imminent lawless action. The failure to make this distinction rendered the law overly broad and in violation of the Constitution.”
So the Supremes hung their hats on free speech. The Supremes ‘held’:
Held: Since the statute, by its words and as applied, purports to punish mere advocacy and to forbid, on pain of criminal punishment, assembly with others merely to advocate the described type of action, it falls within the condemnation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. FREEDOMS OF SPEECH AND PRESS DO NOT PERMIT A STATE TO FORBID ADVOCACY OF THE USE OF FORCE OR OF LAW VIOLATION EXCEPT WHERE SUCH ADVOCACY IS DIRECTED TO INCITING OR PRODUCING IMMINENT LAWLESS ACTION AND IS LIKELY TO INCITE OR PRODUCE SUCH ACTION.
I’d be curious to see how this indictment against Elitzur is ‘ruled’ by the Sanhedrin….I mean, the Israeli judiciary. But, I think we may safely presume (see paragraph below) that Elitzur will serve no prison time. The decision will state he exercised “poor judgment” by failing, in a timely manner, to remove his inflammatory articles from the website after receiving too many approving comments from his followers. Of course, the fact that he was inciting violence is precisely what his cult members understood him to be doing and they obeyed his suggestions, since he is, after all, their ‘teacher’ or ‘rav’. Who knows? Elitzur may even be deemed a “tzadik”, which according to Maimonides is “one whose merit surpasses [his/her] iniquity.”
“The indictment against Elitzur, a senior rabbi of Yitzhar’s Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva, said he should have removed the content when both articles received considerable feedback from supporters of such attacks. However, Elitzur failed to do so, the court documents said.”
So, it appears “a senior rabbi of Yitzhar’s Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva” has already given his ruling. It’s a matter of making it ‘legal’ in the secular world. If you’re going to incite people to violence, and you’re a rabbi, you need to do it in such a way as to ensure plausible deniability.